Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20512518›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology2010

Evaluation of the Xpert MRSA assay for rapid detection of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus from nares swabs of geriatric hospitalized patients and failure to detect a specific SCCmec type IV variant.

C Laurent, P Bogaerts, D Schoevaerdts, O Denis, A Deplano, C Swine, M J Struelens, Y Glupczynski

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Emergence ofASM case reports · 2026
    Article
  4. Rapid Drug Susceptibility Testing to Preserve Antibiotics.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2024
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Distribution of the Most PrevalentFrontiers in microbiology · 2018
    Review
  11. Rapid MRSA PCR on respiratory specimens from ventilated patients with suspected pneumonia: a tool to facilitate antimicrobial stewardship.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2017
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. MRSA screening by the Xpert MRSA PCR assay: pooling samples of the nose, throat, and groin increases the sensitivity of detection without increasing the laboratory costs.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2013
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

C LaurentDepartment of Clinical Microbiology, Laboratoire de Microbiologie, Cliniques Universitaires UCL Mont-Godinne, 1 Avenue G. Thérasse, Yvoir, Belgium.
P Bogaerts
D Schoevaerdts
O Denis
A Deplano
C Swine
M J Struelens
Y Glupczynski
CHU Dinant Godinne UCL Namur · BEErasmus Hospital · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rapid and reliable detection of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) carriers is crucial for control of MRSA nosocomial transmission. We aimed to evaluate the performance of the GeneXpert real-time PCR system using the Xpert MRSA assay on a collection of 40 representative Belgian MRSA strains and for MRSA screening of geriatric inpatients. Double nasal swabs were used: the first swab for the Xpert MRSA assay and the second for culture onto chromogenic selective medium and enrichment broth. All but 1 of the 40 collection strains were recognized as MRSA by the Xpert MRSA assay. Nares swabs were prospectively collected from 246 inpatients including 25 nasal MRSA carriers. Compared with enriched cultures, the sensitivity, the specificity, and the positive and negative predictive values of the Xpert MRSA assay were 69.2%, 97.7%, 78.3%, and 96.3% respectively. The 7 evaluable false-negative results according to the assay were due to its possible lack of sensitivity (n = 3) and to the occurrence of a Belgian MRSA clone carrying a particular staphylococcal chromosomal cassette mec (SCCmec) type IV variant (n = 4) not targeted by the current Xpert MRSA assay. Because of the evolution of SCCmec in MRSA, new primers should be designed and further studies are warranted to ensure continuous monitoring of this assay.

Indexed as

Bacterial ProteinsBacterial Typing TechniquesBacteriological TechniquesCarrier StateCluster AnalysisDNA, BacterialDNA FingerprintingGenotypeHealth Services for the AgedHospitalsHumansMethicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureusNosePolymerase Chain ReactionPredictive Value of TestsSensitivity and SpecificityBacterial ProteinsDNA, Bacterial

Identifiers

PMID20512518
OpenAlexW2077936960

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.